Tucker v. McDermott
New York Surrogate's Court
This was a proceeding to correct an auditor’s report made on a reference of an account filed by testamentary trustees in the estate of James Uglow, deceased.
Read the full summary
This was a proceeding to correct an auditor’s report made on a reference of an account filed by testamentary trustees in the estate of James Uglow, deceased. On the 16th day of February, 1874, the late Surrogate issued an order requiring the executors, John E. Flanigan and William McDermott, testaméntary trustees under the will of the testator, to render an account of their proceedings as such, and that such accounting be at the personal costs and charge of such trustees, unless they should apply to the Surrogate for a final settlement, within ten days from service of the order. On the 23d of…
1Opinion of the Court
The Surrogate.
It is objected by counsel for the infants, and their guardian, that the Surrogate had no authority to grant an order of reference to the auditor, because there was no application for a final accounting and settlement—the order only requiring an accounting.
The cases of Campbell v. Bruen (1 Bradf., 227), Westervelt v. Gregg, (1 Barb. Ch., 469), and Smith v. Van Kuren (2 Id., 473), are cited as authority for this' objection.
*315Section 52, (of 2 Statutes at Large, 94.,) provides that executors and administrators, after the expiration of eighteen months from the time of their…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Vanderheyden v. VanderheydenNew York Court of Chancery · 1830
- Campbell v. BruenNew York Surrogate's Court · 1850
- Westervelt v. GreggNew York Court of Chancery · 1846
- Fisher v. FisherNew York Surrogate's Court · 1850
3Cited by3 opinions
- Freeman v. FreemanNew York Surrogate's Court · 1880
- Whitney v. PhoenixNew York Surrogate's Court · 1880
- Singer v. HawleyNew York Surrogate's Court · 1884